T Nation

Population Explosion and How to Fix It

http://uscl.info/edoc/doc.php?doc_id=49&action=inline

(Planned Parenthood link)

"Encourage increased homosexuality
Educate for family limitation
Fertility control agents in water supply

Encourage women to work

Compulsory abortion of
out-of-wedlock
pregnancies

Compulsory sterilization
of all who have two
children except for a few
who would be allowed
three

Confine childbearing to
only a limited number of
adults

Stock certificate type
permits for children

Planned Parenthood…such a benign organisation!!!

I doubt any of this would work, there are always going to be people who are irresponsible with having too many kids that they can manage financially or morally.

While I believe a license to procreate would be an awesome idea (of course, I would be permitted unlimited crotch critters due to my intellect and charm), it’s just not going to happen.

You want to fix it, end the welfare state. With this gone we won’t have to worry about people having more kids then they can afford, because we wont be here to bail them out.

[quote]John S. wrote:
You want to fix it, end the welfare state. With this gone we won’t have to worry about people having more kids then they can afford, because we wont be here to bail them out.[/quote]

That would work. If people cannot get taxpayer money for kids they cannot afford, they will at least think twice about having more kids.

[quote]MaximusB wrote:
John S. wrote:
You want to fix it, end the welfare state. With this gone we won’t have to worry about people having more kids then they can afford, because we wont be here to bail them out.

That would work. If people cannot get taxpayer money for kids they cannot afford, they will at least think twice about having more kids. [/quote]

The problem is, that not everyone has kids intentionally to get more money. A lot of them are just too damn stupid to realize that sex has consequences, and they aren’t thinking beyond the next 30 minutes.

[quote]pushmepullme wrote:
MaximusB wrote:
John S. wrote:
You want to fix it, end the welfare state. With this gone we won’t have to worry about people having more kids then they can afford, because we wont be here to bail them out.

That would work. If people cannot get taxpayer money for kids they cannot afford, they will at least think twice about having more kids.

The problem is, that not everyone has kids intentionally to get more money. A lot of them are just too damn stupid to realize that sex has consequences, and they aren’t thinking beyond the next 30 minutes.[/quote]

If we end the welfare state that won’t be our problem. Eventually people will figure it out when they see other family’s struggling. There will always be stupid people but ending the welfare state should fix most of the problem.

Ending the welfare state does not make people smart, or change basic instincts.

I am going to buy everyone (except you PMPM) a seventh grade social studies book. Then you won’t have to “imagine” what life looks like without a social safety net (AKA welfare). Then you could read about US History post October 29, 1929, before the New Deal. You would read about 30 percent unemployment, soup lines that stretched for miles and shanty towns in Central Park, New York.

Also, does your elimination of “welfare” include shutting down our penal system, because that it where the largest share of “welfare” dollars is going? We are busy being penny wise and pound foolish. Example: treating a person with organic mental disorders in outpatient care…$3,300 per year. Locking said person up for commission of violent act…$27,000 per year. We currently incarcerate around 600 people per 100,000. That outpaces China, and leaves Japan in the dust with their meager 300 per 100,000.

I would also like to know, are you from some strange planet where people have babies for the $270 per month they stand to gain in cash assistance? Have you ever visited a public housing facility? Would you have children so you could move IN to one?

Look, I am not saying that personal responsibility doesn’t play a role, but don’t simultaneously suck the life out of the public school system and then tell people they should have known better. Also, there is no way it will ever “not be your problem.” Your problem will simply look different. Eliminate the social safety net and you will spend more time than you currently do dodging pan-handlers and more money than you currently do on home security.

I am available all day to knock the cobwebs out of your lazy little brains. Just let me know.

Speaking of school systems and breeding…

[i]It is a Chicago public school full of energy and spirit. It has about 800 girls, and 115 of them have something in common–something you might find disturbing.

All those young ladies are moms or moms-to-be at Paul Robeson High School. It’s not a school for young mothers, it’s a neighborhood school. And all of the pregnancies have happened, despite prevention talk…[/i]

http://cbs2chicago.com/local/Robeson.High.School.2.1251642.html

[quote]pushmepullme wrote:
MaximusB wrote:
John S. wrote:
You want to fix it, end the welfare state. With this gone we won’t have to worry about people having more kids then they can afford, because we wont be here to bail them out.

That would work. If people cannot get taxpayer money for kids they cannot afford, they will at least think twice about having more kids.

The problem is, that not everyone has kids intentionally to get more money. A lot of them are just too damn stupid to realize that sex has consequences, and they aren’t thinking beyond the next 30 minutes.[/quote]

abortion.

[quote]pushmepullme wrote:
Ending the welfare state does not make people smart, or change basic instincts.[/quote]

No, that is not the argument.

It is basic instinct to act in accordance with economic realities. Change those economic realities with respect to welfare and all of the sudden people will change their mind how they feel about abortion, for example.

[quote]pwrlifter198 wrote:
I am going to buy everyone (except you PMPM) a seventh grade social studies book. Then you won’t have to “imagine” what life looks like without a social safety net (AKA welfare). Then you could read about US History post October 29, 1929, before the New Deal. You would read about 30 percent unemployment, soup lines that stretched for miles and shanty towns in Central Park, New York.

Also, does your elimination of “welfare” include shutting down our penal system, because that it where the largest share of “welfare” dollars is going? We are busy being penny wise and pound foolish. Example: treating a person with organic mental disorders in outpatient care…$3,300 per year. Locking said person up for commission of violent act…$27,000 per year. We currently incarcerate around 600 people per 100,000. That outpaces China, and leaves Japan in the dust with their meager 300 per 100,000.

I would also like to know, are you from some strange planet where people have babies for the $270 per month they stand to gain in cash assistance? Have you ever visited a public housing facility? Would you have children so you could move IN to one?

Look, I am not saying that personal responsibility doesn’t play a role, but don’t simultaneously suck the life out of the public school system and then tell people they should have known better. Also, there is no way it will ever “not be your problem.” Your problem will simply look different. Eliminate the social safety net and you will spend more time than you currently do dodging pan-handlers and more money than you currently do on home security.

I am available all day to knock the cobwebs out of your lazy little brains. Just let me know.
[/quote]

Propaganda much?

[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
pushmepullme wrote:
Ending the welfare state does not make people smart, or change basic instincts.

No, that is not the argument.

It is basic instinct to act in accordance with economic realities. Change those economic realities with respect to welfare and all of the sudden people will change their mind how they feel about abortion, for example.[/quote]

Read my post above, then go to library and read until the voices in your head quiet. What the hell do basic insticts and economic realities have in common? By your theory, everyone would wait until they finished graduate school and were well on their way in their professional career, before having children. Yet, that is not what is happening. The reality is, poorly educated, desperate people frequently make bad decisions. Another reality is that excited hormones tend to make people slightly mentally retarded.

Educate and equip, that is the solution. Translation: teach more than abstinence in high school and hand out condoms like they were candy.

[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
pwrlifter198 wrote:
I am going to buy everyone (except you PMPM) a seventh grade social studies book. Then you won’t have to “imagine” what life looks like without a social safety net (AKA welfare). Then you could read about US History post October 29, 1929, before the New Deal. You would read about 30 percent unemployment, soup lines that stretched for miles and shanty towns in Central Park, New York.

Also, does your elimination of “welfare” include shutting down our penal system, because that it where the largest share of “welfare” dollars is going? We are busy being penny wise and pound foolish. Example: treating a person with organic mental disorders in outpatient care…$3,300 per year. Locking said person up for commission of violent act…$27,000 per year. We currently incarcerate around 600 people per 100,000. That outpaces China, and leaves Japan in the dust with their meager 300 per 100,000.

I would also like to know, are you from some strange planet where people have babies for the $270 per month they stand to gain in cash assistance? Have you ever visited a public housing facility? Would you have children so you could move IN to one?

Look, I am not saying that personal responsibility doesn’t play a role, but don’t simultaneously suck the life out of the public school system and then tell people they should have known better. Also, there is no way it will ever “not be your problem.” Your problem will simply look different. Eliminate the social safety net and you will spend more time than you currently do dodging pan-handlers and more money than you currently do on home security.

I am available all day to knock the cobwebs out of your lazy little brains. Just let me know.

Propaganda much?[/quote]

Reductionist much?

Look you can’t stop people fucking so you have to look at it from the other end. The way to control populations is disease and war.

[quote]pwrlifter198 wrote:
What the hell do basic insticts and economic realities have in common? By your theory, everyone would wait until they finished graduate school and were well on their way in their professional career, before having children.[/quote]

Use some common sense.

Valuations are individual and subjective.

Not everyone can get a graduate degree nor do most people need a graduate degree. Do they need not have children?

You ask what basic instincts and economic realities have in common:
most people try to not put themselves in situation where they become worse off than they would have been otherwise. We call this SELF INTEREST. All economic activity strives toward the self interest of the actor. How can it not be basic instinct to want to be better off tomorrow than one is right now?

Knowing certain information gives us an advantage with respect to action and typically we would not purposefully act contrary to that information and put ourselves in a worse situation than we are right now. That is fundamentally economic and self interest.

[quote]pwrlifter198 wrote:
LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
pwrlifter198 wrote:
I am going to buy everyone (except you PMPM) a seventh grade social studies book. Then you won’t have to “imagine” what life looks like without a social safety net (AKA welfare). Then you could read about US History post October 29, 1929, before the New Deal. You would read about 30 percent unemployment, soup lines that stretched for miles and shanty towns in Central Park, New York.

Also, does your elimination of “welfare” include shutting down our penal system, because that it where the largest share of “welfare” dollars is going? We are busy being penny wise and pound foolish. Example: treating a person with organic mental disorders in outpatient care…$3,300 per year. Locking said person up for commission of violent act…$27,000 per year. We currently incarcerate around 600 people per 100,000. That outpaces China, and leaves Japan in the dust with their meager 300 per 100,000.

I would also like to know, are you from some strange planet where people have babies for the $270 per month they stand to gain in cash assistance? Have you ever visited a public housing facility? Would you have children so you could move IN to one?

Look, I am not saying that personal responsibility doesn’t play a role, but don’t simultaneously suck the life out of the public school system and then tell people they should have known better. Also, there is no way it will ever “not be your problem.” Your problem will simply look different. Eliminate the social safety net and you will spend more time than you currently do dodging pan-handlers and more money than you currently do on home security.

I am available all day to knock the cobwebs out of your lazy little brains. Just let me know.

Propaganda much?

Reductionist much?[/quote]

7th grade civics isn’t what I would use as a tool to educate people since it is mostly lies anyway.

That you look to it as a model of truth is sad in itself but that you would actually cite it to others with way more knowledge than you is downright fraudulent.

[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
pwrlifter198 wrote:
LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
pwrlifter198 wrote:
I am going to buy everyone (except you PMPM) a seventh grade social studies book. Then you won’t have to “imagine” what life looks like without a social safety net (AKA welfare). Then you could read about US History post October 29, 1929, before the New Deal. You would read about 30 percent unemployment, soup lines that stretched for miles and shanty towns in Central Park, New York.

Also, does your elimination of “welfare” include shutting down our penal system, because that it where the largest share of “welfare” dollars is going? We are busy being penny wise and pound foolish. Example: treating a person with organic mental disorders in outpatient care…$3,300 per year. Locking said person up for commission of violent act…$27,000 per year. We currently incarcerate around 600 people per 100,000. That outpaces China, and leaves Japan in the dust with their meager 300 per 100,000.

I would also like to know, are you from some strange planet where people have babies for the $270 per month they stand to gain in cash assistance? Have you ever visited a public housing facility? Would you have children so you could move IN to one?

Look, I am not saying that personal responsibility doesn’t play a role, but don’t simultaneously suck the life out of the public school system and then tell people they should have known better. Also, there is no way it will ever “not be your problem.” Your problem will simply look different. Eliminate the social safety net and you will spend more time than you currently do dodging pan-handlers and more money than you currently do on home security.

I am available all day to knock the cobwebs out of your lazy little brains. Just let me know.

Propaganda much?

Reductionist much?

7th grade civics isn’t what I would use as a tool to educate people since it is mostly lies anyway.

That you look to it as a model of truth is sad in itself but that you would actually cite it to others with way more knowledge than you is downright fraudulent.[/quote]

First, you don’t know anyone with way more knowledge than me. Second, if seventh grade social study’s texts lie it is in the watering down of American history and painting it in a light most favorable to us.

[quote]pwrlifter198 wrote:
First, you don’t know anyone with way more knowledge than me. Second, if seventh grade social study’s texts lie it is in the watering down of American history and painting it in a light most favorable to us.
[/quote]

So then why would you cite it as a source of truthful information if you were aware of the lies contained therein? You are unethical at best and at worst a plain liar.

Promoting lies is lying. Why should we take anything you say seriously from here on out? You are nothing more than a liar.